Dec 092011
 

Fast and Furious Scandal Cries Out for Answers

Fox News
Dec. 8, 2011

 

 

Attorney General Eric Holder testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington before the House Judiciary Committee. (AP)
The “Fast & Furious” scandal is getting messier and messier. New e-mails finally released late this past Friday reveal that the Department of Justice personal viewed the then-secret operation as a way to push for more gun control laws. Despite administration promises to the contrary, whistleblowers have endured “isolation, retaliation and transfer.”

Meanwhile the operation’s managers have done pretty well, some have even received promotions.

Thursday Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that the operation was “wholly unacceptable,” but he still offers absolutely no explanation to explain why the program was instituted.


Related Video: New reaction to Fast, Furious testimony

Statement from Fast and Furious hearing

What’s going on here? Let’s see…

- You have a government agency ordering gun dealers to make sales to suspected criminals that the dealers didn’t want to sell to.

- You have government agents testifying that the being purchased were not being traced. No attempt was made to even alert the Mexican government that the United States of America was given guns to drug gangs in their country.

Up until now the only justification from the Obama administration for this “program” is that the Bush administration supposedly did the same thing with operation “Wide Receiver.”

In fact, it is a defense that the Justice Department and Congressional Democrats have raise multiple times. Congressman Elijah Cummings’ office just made this defense on Wednesday.

But the “Fast & Furious” and “Wide Receiver” programs are not remotely similar on the most important fact: The Bush administration tried to trace the guns and informed the Mexican authorities when the guns went across the border, but the Obama administration did not.

And it is well-known how ineffective tracing programs have been anyway.

The problem is that if “Wide Receiver” failed in tracing the guns and was subsequently shutdown, why is the solution to not even bother to try tracing the firearms? Holder’s conclusion in testimony before Congress was simply: “Guns lost during this operation will continue to show up at crime scenes on both sides of the border.”

Would Holder have been as forgiving if a gun dealer had been caught intentionally doing the same thing that the Obama administration has been caught doing?

The new e-mails documenting Justice Department discussions on the political benefits from the “Fast & Furious” program are disturbing and they are only going to give more ammunition to conspiracy theorists for why the Obama administration instituted the program to begin with.

People who haven’t trusted the Obama administration on this issue have already pointed out that “Fast & Furious” started pushing guns into Mexico at the same time that the Obama administration was making its inaccurate claims about the United States being a major source of Mexican crime guns.

The new internal messages reveal that in early January this year, a month before there was any publicity about “Fast & Furious,” Department of Justice personnel were pointing out: “this case ["Fast & Furious] could be a strong supporting factor [for new regulations] if we can determine how many multiple sales of long guns occurred during the course of this case.”

More evidence has also surfaced showing how uncomfortable gun dealers were in selling these guns that they didn’t want to sell. One dealer wrote BATF officials in April 2010: “[W]e were hoping to put together something like a letter of understanding to alleviate concerns of some type of recourse against us down the road for selling these items. We just want to make sure we are cooperating with ATF and that we are not viewed as selling to the bad guys.”

Unfortunately, Holders’ testimony Thursday didn’t make things any clearer. His definition of “lying” depending on one’s state of mind sounded positively Clintonian.

But ultimately the Obama administration still faces a bigger problem. Can they ever come up with any remotely plausible explanation for why anyone would have started a program to push untraceable guns into Mexico? The longer it takes to provide an explanation, the more plausible the conspiracy theorists sound that this was all done for politics.
Direct Link:  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/12/09/fast-and-furious-scandal-cries-out-for-answers/#ixzz1g6EZxNGO

 

Nov 242011
 

Man (Private Detective) Guilty of Raping Ex-Girlfriend and Then Framing Her
By DAN BILEFSKY
November 23, 2011
Photos byUli Seit for The New York Times


Jerry Ramrattan after he was found guilty of more than 10 charges. Mr. Ramrattan cajoled false witnesses into saying Seemona Sumasar robbed them at gunpoint, prosecutors said.
* Seemona Sumasar said all along that she was raped by her ex-boyfriend, who then framed her for a series of armed robberies that never took place.

Prosecutors said Mr. Ramrattan hatched his scheme after Ms. Sumasar, right, refused to drop rape charges against him.

On Wednesday, a jury in State Supreme Court in Queens agreed, finding the ex-boyfriend, Jerry Ramrattan, guilty of more than 10 charges, including rape, perjury and conspiracy. Mr. Ramrattan faces more than 25 years in prison when he is sentenced on Jan. 4.

Using knowledge he gleaned partly from watching television crime dramas like “C.S.I.,” Mr. Ramrattan, a private detective in Queens, orchestrated what prosecutors called the most complex and diabolical frame-up in New York in recent memory.

For Ms. Sumasar, 36, the verdict, following a day and a half of deliberation, brought vindication after a nightmarish experience that had transformed her from rape victim to criminal.

“Now that this is over, I can start my life again,” she said in an interview. “Last year, I spent Thanksgiving inside a jail cell. Jerry told so many lies, and I was imprisoned because authorities had decided to believe him. But I am not bitter. The truth won out in the end.”

As the guilty verdict was announced, Mr. Ramrattan, 39, who had muttered at the prosecution witnesses and smiled at the jury during the trial, sat quietly, staring ahead. Outside the courtroom, Ms. Sumasar’s family leapt in joy.

Prosecutors told the jury that Mr. Ramrattan hatched the scheme after Ms. Sumasar, a former restaurant owner and analyst with Morgan Stanley, refused to drop rape charges against him. They said he intimidated and cajoled false witnesses into telling the authorities that she had dressed as a police officer and robbed them at gunpoint.

While jailed for seven months, until last December, Ms. Sumasar was separated from her young daughter. She lost her restaurant, and her house in Far Rockaway, Queens, went into foreclosure. Her bail was set at $1 million, which she could not afford. Meanwhile, Mr. Ramrattan walked free until an informer came forward and exposed his ruse.

The verdict was a righting of wrongs for the Queens district attorney’s office, which had insisted, along with the Nassau County district attorney’s office, on Ms. Sumasar’s guilt until she was freed from her cell on Long Island just weeks before her own trial was to begin. Legal experts said the case was a cautionary tale of how tunnel vision could infect law enforcement officials, in some cases pushing them to wrongly punish the innocent.

Prosecutors insisted that few could have seen Mr. Ramrattan’s sinister plot.

Frank DeGaetano, an assistant district attorney and the prosecutor in Mr. Ramrattan’s case, alluded to the scale and brutality of his crimes.

“Jerry Ramrattan created a complex web to ensnare Seemona,” Mr. DeGaetano told jurors. “He is unique: who goes to such extremes to destroy a person?”

Mr. Ramrattan’s lawyer, Frank Kelly — whose request for a mistrial, on the grounds that prosecutors did not hand over vital documents, was refused — said he would appeal. During his summation, he accused prosecutors of relying on “a bunch of liars, thieves and manipulators” to make their case.

The nearly month long trial offered two narratives that were difficult to reconcile. Prosecutors portrayed Ms. Sumasar as a single mother charmed by a wily confidence man who ruined her life. But the defense presented Ms. Sumasar as a scorned woman who falsely accused her ex-boyfriend of rape because their relationship had soured.

Members of the jury said the guilty verdict hinged on their belief that Mr. Ramrattan had raped Ms. Sumasar, giving him a motive to set his plot in motion. They said the defense’s argument had seemed to be a smoke screen.

“We believed that she was raped,” said Caryn Eyring-Swick, the jury forewoman. “She didn’t fall apart or crumble on the stand. You could see her jaw tighten. We knew that Ramrattan had done something that would affect his victims forever.”

Jury members said they had not been convinced by the defense’s argument that Ms. Sumasar was a jilted and vengeful woman.

Denise Li, an alternate jury member from Flushing, said the defense’s claim that Ms. Sumasar was set up by underworld characters to whom she owed money seemed like a conspiracy theory conjured by Mr. Ramrattan. She said she had been put off by Mr. Ramrattan’s demeanor in court.

“Ramrattan was so arrogant and smirking during the trial,” Ms. Li said. “He was manipulative and thought so highly of himself, he thought he could get away with it.”

Danielle Stancik, another juror, said the case seemed like Hollywood fiction. “If I had seen this on TV,” she said, “my reaction would be, ‘How could this really happen?’ ”

Direct Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/nyregion/jerry-ramrattan-found-guilty-of-raping-and-framing-ex-girlfriend.html